  gaforcesUnited We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA | Lobby Is all this BS intended to circumvent the already loophole filled agreements they made to purchase the spectrum in the auction?
--
Let them eat FIBER! | |
|
 | | | Re: Lobby No, it's just layered on top of those meaningless Carterfone rules to ensure a good fauxsumer show. | |
|
| | gaforcesUnited We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA | Re: Lobby I dunno if I agree with that. They are spending a lot of money for just show?
Good business strategy to get all the ducks lined up in a row before the LTE networks come online for easy killing and plucking.
--
Let them eat FIBER! | |
|
| | | Host:
Time Warner Intern..
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
3 edits | Re: Lobby They are spending a lot of money for just show? The goal is to lay down a regulatory framework that prevents the FCC from expanding its authority through Title 2 reclassification, under which the FCC would have some actual authority to regulate ISPs. Verizon hopes to either get an entirely voluntary, self-regulatory system in place, or to get one of their well-lobbied Democrat or Republican friends in Congress to draft a law based on their proposal before more progressive laws with tough protections can be tabled. Both of those would be entirely for show, with Verizon proclaiming they support consumer protections, but having written said rules, knowing precisely how to get around them. | |
|
| | | | |
| | |  N3OGHYo Soy Col. "Bat" GuanoPremium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1 | The idea of "a lot" of money is relative.
If I thought I could make/save millions, a couple grand would be squat...
--
Petty people are disproportionally corrupted by petty power | |
|
 morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000 | Verizon's Arrogance and Greed Verizon's arrogance and greed is simply amazing. Perhaps more amazing is the fact that VZ managed to glom onto Google and get them to switch their net neutrality tune while gaining some credibility and goodwill from a Google partnership.
Google's goodwill has no where to go but down. Bad move. | |
|
| |
|
| | | Re: United States is now a Third World Country. Have you ever been in a 3rd world country? | |
|
| | openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | Re: United States is now a Third World Country. That question is often asked of people that make the claim that the US is a 3rd world country. I haven't seen many affirmative responses. | |
|
| | | |
| | | | Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| Re: United States is now a Third World Country. said by Mr Matt:  Our lawmakers are behaving like those behave in a third world county. So what is your experience in making laws in a 3rd world country? What 3rd world country did you visit and participate in their government functions? What laws in the 3rd world country you were in did you pass? | |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: United States is now a Third World Country. Sounds like you weren't actually making laws in Jamaica, but thanks for trying, please drive through. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Re: United States is now a Third World Country. said by NOCTech75:Sounds like you weren't actually making laws in Jamaica, but thanks for trying, please drive through. So he has to *make* laws to make an analogy. Are you daft? Why do you purposely ignore the relevance of his experience? What do you gain by keeping yourself in total ignorance?
There was a government with huge control over an industry. His company wanted to compete in that industry. With government help the incumbent made it nearly impossible for the little guy to succeed. The government officials received "contributions" for their efforts in return.
It's not that freaking hard to understand. | |
|
| | | | | | | | Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: United States is now a Third World Country. said by sonicmerlin:said by NOCTech75:Sounds like you weren't actually making laws in Jamaica, but thanks for trying, please drive through. So he has to *make* laws to make an analogy. Are you daft? Why do you purposely ignore the relevance of his experience? What do you gain by keeping yourself in total ignorance? So you are in a 3rd world country? Really, better get away from that keyboard oh ITG, and go out and live on the tough 3rd world streets of Cleveland. | |
|
| | PCDEC
join:2004-10-12
Allentown, PA | Yes. I live in the United States of America. | |
|
|  LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | said by Mr Matt: United States is now a Third World Country: Not even close. And telecomm issues wouldn't be what could put us in to 3rd world status. What could is a massive continually growing deficit and sending jobs overseas faster than we create new ones in the US. | |
|
| | |
| | Proposal would let the camel's nose into the tent. The big problem with the "Goorizon" proposal is that it would allow the government to regulate the Net. Once that camel's nose is in the tent, that would be it -- game over! The FCC would attempt to acquire the power to enforce "decency" on the Net. And because any traffic prioritization would be deemed to be "presumptively" wrong, quality of service would go into the toilet and rates would go up.
The Internet has prospered for 27 years with no regulation, and it needs none. We should reject not only this proposal but all proposals to regulate the Net. | |
|
| | | Re: Proposal would let the camel's nose into the tent. Brett,
Are the special access lines you use to carry your WISP traffic back to the Internet backbone part of the "Internet"? If so, then I am curious why you think the net has never been regulated. You yourself have advocated all over the place for even more stringent special access regulations, since they are an input to your business.
Also, if what you really mean is last-mile ISPs like yourself, you are wrong there too. All sorts of webs of regulations have applied since the birth of the Internet, from the Computer Inquiries to ISP-bound traffic access charges, to the 1998 Advanced Service Order. We are only recently in an era of un-regulation. | |
|
| | | Proving once again, "only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." | |
|
| | | said by SuperWISP:The big problem with the "Goorizon" proposal is that it would allow the government to regulate the Net. Once that camel's nose is in the tent, that would be it -- game over! The FCC would attempt to acquire the power to enforce "decency" on the Net. And because any traffic prioritization would be deemed to be "presumptively" wrong, quality of service would go into the toilet and rates would go up. The Internet has prospered for 27 years with no regulation, and it needs none. We should reject not only this proposal but all proposals to regulate the Net. Better "decency" rules than let thieves run wild. | |
|
| | | | Re: Proposal would let the camel's nose into the tent. “The Internet has prospered for 27 years with no regulation…”
Of all the totally ridiculous, anti-factual statements that can be constructed in the English language, this is close to the worst.
The internet originated as a DOD project, 100% government funded. It was BORN in a government-driven environment.
Public access to the internet was originally thru telephone companies which were totally regulated in their obligation to act as "common carriers" who (a) could NOT discriminate as to who you could contact, and (b) could not be responsible for the legality of what you did on their network. Once upon a time, we had enforced network neutrality.
The FCC, created by your Congress in 1934, is charged with ensuring efficient, low-cost, most valuable management of the nation's airwaves. Wireless services have (at least, nominally) ALWAYS been under the government. The airwaves that cell phones use is licensed from the government.
Even the blatantly one-sided Verizoogle proposal doesn't dare make such obviously clueless assertions. Why do you? If you want to assert that govts always screw up business, go ahead. But I'm about to get on a (delayed) flight and am sure glad that the FAA requires Delta to inspect its planes, requires minimum rest times for crews, etc, on the flight I'll be on, unlike those poor souls who perished in Buffalo.
So, to your claim: it's absurd. To your political beliefs, ask any real economist: what are the conditions where a "free market" performs badly? When you have only two sellers controlling over half of a market, is there any reason to expect the country to benefit? PS: the answer is "Gawd, no!" | |
|
Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·Mediacom
 ·T-Mobile US
| Verizon a consumer's predator? "Here's a real fact: Verizon wants what any massive, government-pampered duopolist wants: more strings-free taxpayer money, a lazy regulatory body with no consumer protection authority whatsoever, government protection from competition, and the ability to engage in any business practices they like, no matter how unethical or anti-competitive."
Sounds like the top executives would fail a business ethics course if they went back to college. | |
|
| | | Re: Verizon a consumer's predator? Business ethics? Isn't that an antithetical? | |
|
| | | | Re: Verizon a consumer's predator? These courses do exist. At least in private schools. | |
|
|  coldmoonPremium
join:2002-02-04
Broadway, NC
 ·Windstream
| said by chgo_man99:"Here's a real fact: Verizon wants what any massive, government-pampered duopolist wants: more strings-free taxpayer money, a lazy regulatory body with no consumer protection authority whatsoever, government protection from competition, and the ability to engage in any business practices they like, no matter how unethical or anti-competitive." Sounds like the top executives would fail a business ethics course if they went back to college. The only people that the execs are accountable to are the shareholders who (presumably) have profit as their top priority. I don't think they would care what grade the execs got in their ethics classes or even if they ever took such courses...
JMHO
Mike
--
Returnil - 21st Century body armor for your PC | |
|
| | Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·Mediacom
·T-Mobile US
2 edits | Re: Verizon a consumer's predator? I think schools really mean well by teaching those courses.
The more people in power who have some ethics, the less need for a regulation in government level.
These courses became very widespread since fall of Enron.
But unfortunately, the reality seems to be very different with government agencies overlooking consumer protections and going to bed with corporations for their money.
They should still teach those courses though. They should be in public schools as well. | |
|
| | | | said by coldmoon:said by chgo_man99:"Here's a real fact: Verizon wants what any massive, government-pampered duopolist wants: more strings-free taxpayer money, a lazy regulatory body with no consumer protection authority whatsoever, government protection from competition, and the ability to engage in any business practices they like, no matter how unethical or anti-competitive." Sounds like the top executives would fail a business ethics course if they went back to college. The only people that the execs are accountable to are the shareholders who (presumably) have profit as their top priority. I don't think they would care what grade the execs got in their ethics classes or even if they ever took such courses... JMHO Mike The only people execs should be accountable to are the ones that SHOULD ENFORCE THE LAW. | |
|
| | |
See 7 replies to this post |
|
| | |
| | | openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | Re: Verizon a consumer's predator? What interest does Verizon have in treating you fairly above profit? What interest does any for profit company if treating your fairly beyond profit? BTW, Verizon Wireless is a joint venture between VZ and VOD with VZ owning a majority share. | |
|
| | Karl, I know you had a lot of ground to cover...; Perhaps the most blatant lie is the notion that we ALREADY HAVE a reasonably net-neutral environment. But in fact, wireless access today does not even meet the CarterPhone standard that broke down AT&T's landline monopoly.
Best example I can cough up: Verizon and AT&T, the dominant wireless carriers, forbid users from tethering other equipment to their company-provided equipment. Rather than define the AMOUNT of data you use, they arbitrarily restrict the EQUIPMENT that you can attach, and the TYPE OF USE you can make. That's two of Google's 2007 4 Freedoms, totally steamrollered today, and obviously not restricted under the Verizoogle proposal. | |
|
| | and people want american isps to get into canada NOT and NO FRAKIGN WAY EH........ | |
|
|
|
United States is now a Third World Country.
Goorizon is to big to regulate. Goorizon will payoff lawmakers as necessary to buy legislation favorable to them. American Lawmakers have only the interest of the wealthiest Three Percent of American Citizens in mind they do not have any respect for ordinary American Citizens.
Re: United States is now a Third World Country.
To the best of my recollection one of the major stockholders in Verizon is a foreign company, Vodafone. Listen carefully and you can hear the hissing sound as Vodafone tries to suck us dry! What interest does Vodafone have treating Americans fairly above profits.